tv The Ed Show MSNBC October 18, 2012 3:00am-4:00am EDT
president obama went offense and put mitt romney on the ropes. tonight, we'll tell you who won the debate and if this is a game changer. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. everybody here has heard of the new deal? you've heard of the fair deal. you've heard of the square deal. mitt romney's trying to sell you a sketchy deal. >> the thumping continues on the stump. >> please proceed. >> the president breaks out the trapper keeper on mitt romney. >> we don't have to collect a bunch of binders to find talented young women. >> tonight, the untold story of the debate. not only did president obama dominate -- >> candy, what governor romney said just isn't true. >> but mitt romney was just awful. >> i want to make sure we get that for the record. >> bob shrum and michael steele was analysis. cecile richards on romney's growing disaster with women voters. >> they brought us whole binders full of women. >> james hoffa on the president's china smackdown.
>> governor, you're the last person who's going to get tough on china. >> and call the wambulance again. >> the problem is, candy crowley sort of waded in to help the president. >> they should just eliminate moderators overall. >> thanks for watching tonight, focus. if you saw president obama today, you noticed a little spring in his step. the president was back on the campaign trail in the state of ohio today, fresh off his successful debate performance. it's pretty obvious, the president thinks last night went pretty well for him. especially his attacks on mitt romney. >> so let's recap what we learned last night. his tax plan doesn't add up. his jobs plan doesn't create jobs. his deficit reduction plan adds to the deficit. we've been there. we've tried that. we're not going back. we're moving forward. that's why i need your vote. we've got to finish what we started in 2008. >> the president feels good and
so does his base. he turned around a lot of dejected supporters with his energetic performance last night, no doubt. mitt romney was trying to keep spirits high at a campaign rally in virginia, but his stump speech, well, it was a little bit different. for instance, there was not one word about the administration's response to libya. interesting. a week ago, romney was giving lengthy speeches to military cadets about the libya response. he tried to use the benghazi attack to his advantage in last night's debate. >> on the day following the assassination of the united states ambassador, the first time that's happened since 1979, when we have four americans killed there, when apparently we didn't know what happened, that the president, the day after that happened, flies to las vegas for a political fund-raiser, then the next day to colorado for another event, another political event. i think these actions taken by a president and a leader have symbolic significance. and perhaps even material significance.
>> the following exchange between the candidates and moderator candy crowley sealed the deal for the president and the debate victory. it also gave president obama a major advantage on the libya issue. everyone is talking about these two minutes today, and with good cause. >> does the buck stop with your secretary of state as far as what went on here? >> secretary clinton has done an extraordinary job, but she works for me. i'm the president and i'm always responsible. and that's why nobody's more interested in finding out exactly what happened than i do. the day after the attack, governor, i stood in the rose garden, and i told the american people and the world that we were going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror, and i also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime. and then a few days later, i was there greeting the caskets coming into andrews air force
base. and grieving with the families. and the suggestion that anybody on my team, whether it was the secretary of state, our u.n. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. that's not what we do. that's not what i do as president. that's not what i do as commander in chief. >> governor, if you want to reply just quickly. >> i certainly do. i think it's interesting the president just said something, which is that, on the day after the attack, he went in the rose garden and said that this was an act of terror. >> that's what i said. >> you said, in the rose garden, the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. it was not a spontaneous demonstration. is that what you're saying? >> please proceed, governor.
>> i want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in benghazi an act of terror. >> get the transcript. >> he did, in fact, sir. so let me call it an act of terror -- >> can you say that a little louder, candy? >> he did call it an act of terror. >> the videotape doesn't lie. candy crowley and the president were correct. >> no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. today we mourn for more americans who represent the very best of the united states of america. we will not waver to see that justice is done for this terrible act, and make no mistake, justice will be done. >> in fact, president obama was even more explicit about the act of terror a day later. >> what i want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow americans to justice. i want people around the world
to hear me, to all of those who would do us arm, no act of terror will go unpunished. is that, already, hundreds of thousands of people like the presidenturing the libya exchange last night. it was a lot different than the mitt romney who looked is so confident as he told lie after lie during the debate in denver two weeks ago. back in colorado, we saw a guy named moderate mitt. last night romney tried to fool everyone with moderate mitt once again. watch his very first answer of the night, in response to a question from a college student. >> i want to make sure we keep our pell grant program growing. we're also going to have our loan program, so that people are able to afford school.
>> holy smokes! all of a sudden moderate mitt loves pell grants. even though the real romney supports demolishing the pell grant program through paul ryan's budget. which, of course, he says he supports. president obama never let mitt romney define the terms of the debate, especially on romney's economic plan. >> now, governor romney was a very successful investor. if somebody came to you, governor, with a plan that said, here, i want to spend $7 trillion or $8 trillion, and we're going to pay for it, but we can't tell you until maybe after the election how we're going to do it, you haven't have taken such a sketchy deal, and neither should you, the american people. >> president obama also reminded voters of what the real mitt romney says on the campaign trail. not the washington whitewash from moderate mitt. >> when governor romney stands here, after a year of campaigning. when during a republican primary, he stood on stage and
said, i'm going to give tax cuts -- he didn't say tax rate cuts, he said tax cuts, to everybody, including the top 1%, you should believe him. because that's been his history. >> when president obama was given the chance to compare mitt romney with george bush, he said romney was more right wing than the former president. >> there are some things where governor romney is different from george bush. heck, george bush didn't propose turning medicare into a voucher. george bush embraced comprehensive immigration reform. he didn't call for self-deportation. george bush never suggested that we eliminate funding for planned parenthood. so there are differences between governor romney and george bush, but they're not on economic policy. in some ways, he's gone to a more extreme place when it comes to social policies. >> this onslaught by president obama put mitt romney in a rough position. just like his answer on libya,
romney had to move out of his comfort zone to respond to these allegations. he tried to say that he would be tough on china and president obama blasted him. >> trade. i'll crack down on china. president bush didn't. >> when he talks about getting tough on china, keep in mind that governor romney invested in companies that were pioneers of outsourcing to china. >> then romney tried to define his self-deportation policy on immigration. again, president obama knocked romney off of his game. >> self-deportation says let people make their own choice. what i was saying is, we're not going to round up 12 million people, undocumented, illegals and take them out of the nation. instead, let people make their own choice. and if they find that they can't get the benefits here that they want and they can't find the job they want, then they'll make a decision to go a place where they have better opportunities. >> his top adviser on immigration is the guy who designed the arizona law, the entirety of it.
not everify, the entire thing. that's his whole policy. >> romney was on unsure footing for most of the night. he did a good job putting himself in a corner on a major issue and the president didn't have to say a thing. here's romney answering a question on equal pay for women. >> i recognize that if you're going to have women in the workforce, that sometimes you need to be more flexible. my chief of staff, for instance, had two kids who were still in school. she said, i can't be here until 7:00 or 8:00 at night. i need to be able to get home at 5:00 so i can get home making dinner for my kids and be home for them. so i said, fine, let's have a flexible schedule so we can have hours that will work for you. we need to have employers in the new economy, in the economy that i'm going to bring to play, that are going to be so anxious to get good workers, that they're going to be anxious to hire women. >> romney had no answer for fixing pay and equality in america. he wants to hire more women and give them flexible schedules so they can go home and cook dinner.
he may have lost the women's vote last night. president obama saved his best for last. he delivered a closing argument as the clock ran out and mitt romney had no ability to respond. >> i believe governor romney's a good man. he loves his family, cares about his faith. but i also believe that when he said, behind closed doors, that 47% of the country consider themselves victims, who refuse personal responsibility, think about who he was talking about. folks on social security who have worked all their lives. veterans, who have sacrificed for this country. students, who are out there, trying to hopefully advance their own dreams, but also this country's dreams. soldiers, who are overseas, fighting for us right now. people who are working hard every day, paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don't make enough income.
and i want to fight for them. that's what i've been doing for the last four years. because if they succeed, i believe the country succeeds. >> this was an answer democrats wanted and the american people needed to hear. this was a debate where president obama had to deliver. he did. i would venture to say that there are some americans who have paid no attention to any of this, until the first three debates. of course, the one with the vice president as well. what we've learned about mitt romney is that he's rude. he's a bully. he's a guy who always seems to get his way and doesn't like it when it doesn't turn out good for him. we've also learned that romney has an innate ability to be disrespectful. last night he showed little respect for the moderator, little respect for the president. he even told the president, "you'll get your turn." in fact, romney shows little respect for women, for women's rights, for workers, for workers' rights. look at what he does to workers.
we'll tell that story on friday. from freeport, illinois. mitt romney's utter and complete disregard for the middle class, i think, was on full display last night. he can't make the pitch to the middle class because he doesn't understand them. but there was something else on display last night. and that was the intensity of the president of the united states. that intensity left a lot of supporters very confident. and as i start this broadcast every night, i think they're thinking this. let's get to work. get your cell phones out. i want to know what you think. tonight's question, who won last night's debate? text "a" for president obama, text "b" for mitt romney to 622639, and you can always go to our blog at ed.msnbc.com. we'll bring you the results later on in the show. coming up, former rnc chair michael steele and nyu professor bob shrum. we'll break it all down, the best moments of last night's debate. stay tuned.
[ heart beating, monitor beeping ] woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen.
coming up, can we come to an agreement? president obama came out strong in last night's debate. will it have an impact on the polls? will it have an impact on how people vote? bob shrum and michael steele will give me the full debate analysis and discussion, next. then, a massachusetts women's group sets the record straight on mitt romney's binders. but his campaign can't do the same on his stand on equal pay. and while romney promises to get tough on china, tell that to the workers in freeport, illinois, because they're losing their jobs to the folks in china because of his business policies. i'll talk to teamsters president, james hoffa. share your thoughts with us on facebook and on twitter using #edshow. we are coming right back.
that's why i put up a five-point plan, that gets america 12 million new jobs in four years and rising take-home pay. >> governor romney's says he's got a five-point plan. governor romney doesn't have a five-point plan, he has a one-point plan. and that plan is to make sure that folks at the top play by a different set of rules. that's been his philosophy in the private sector, that's been his philosophy as governor, that's been his philosophy as a presidential candidate. >> welcome back to "the ed show." thanks for watching tonight. president obama came out swinging last night and gave the motivation that the base was looking the for. over 65 million people watched the debate. so don't you think that curiosity was a little high on how the president was going to recover from debate number one? president obama ended the idea
of moderate mitt, by exposing romney's far-right policies and actually cornering him on the issues. he put romney on the defensive, resulting in a petty, childish performance by the republican challenger. president obama was clear, straight forward, and made solid arguments. point after point. his performance changed the game and moved the ball forward for his campaign. the mojo is back with them. the meanwhile, the real clear politics average of all polls, you know, it doesn't really show that, at least not yet, anyway. mitt romney with a 0.4 percentage lead over president obama. it will be interesting to track in the next 48 hours. for more, let's turn to bob shrum, professor of public policy at nyu and contributor at the daily beast. also with us tonight, michael steele, msnbc contributor and former chairman of the rnc. gentleman, great to have you with us tonight. bob, you first. can we call it a clear win for president obama? i mean, there was so much talk about what the president had to do going into this debate.
i think it's pretty common knowledge in the blog sphere and on talk radio that it was a good performance by the president. but will this move the polls? what do you think? >> he did it all. he did everything he had to do. i think it will move the polls. we'll have to wait a few days to see that. we saw that after the first debate two weeks ago, when i said that i thought the president lost. i thought he clearly won last night. he was helped by romney. he was helped by romney for two reasons. one, romney made a classic mistake. he came to the second debate, thoroughly prepared for the first debate. he said the same lines, often using the same words that he had said two weeks ago. so he had telegraphed every line, he had telegraphed his arguments. the president knew what he was going to say and was prepared to box him, to call him, to hold him accountable. secondly, on style, romney was like the hall monitor. and then he was lake a frustrated guy who, because he couldn't have everything his way. you know, if ownership on the wrong side of the gender gap, i wouldn't fight with a female
moderator of a debate. i wouldn't try to bully her. and it's even worse if you end up failing. >> michael, is there any issue that mitt romney gained ground on last night? >> i think he did, on the libya piece. >> michael! you're not serious! come on, you can't be serious. i mean, you can't be serious about that! it was a disaster. it was a train wreck. >> bob, can i make my point? >> bob, you do this all the time. let me make my point. >> i just didn't think you would come -- >> gentleman, gentleman. >> let me just make the point. >> let's restate the question. >> thank you! >> there's been a lot of folks out there who have said there was a clear victory for president obama. but did -- >> i would agree with that. >> but -- you would agree with that, but is there any subject that you think he gained on? you think it's libya? >> i think there are two. i think there are two. i think, again, on the economy, and the instapolls, if you will, after that showed, yes, obama
won on the points, but on the substance of the argument and romney laid out, i think, a very good indictment on the economy. he's very effective at making that point and stressing that point. folks, the voters sided with romney 2 to 1 in the cnn poll afterwards. so that is, that is a nice setup for the last debate. the point i was going to make on libya -- >> sure. >> is it was awkward, it was mishandled, but the reality of it is, going into a debate that the last debate only on foreign policy, it opened up a lot of questions that the moderator can dig down on. the president's going to have to be on point on. there's going to be a timeline that's going to be discussed. and trust me, whether schrum, the democrats and the president does not want to be having this discussion about the ins and outs about what happened in libya two weeks before an election. >> bob, what about that? so i think that there is an opportunity there for romney to stress these points. >> this is neocon nonsense.
>> okay. >> the fact of the matter is that the republicans somehow have the illusion that they can make the case that this president has been weak on foreign policy or national security. he has about a 20-point lead on that in most of the polls. so if mitt romney thinks he's going to be back in this game or is going to make a lot of progress by focusing on libya, i think he's making a big mistake. >> well, bob, secondly -- >> he's in the game. that's your problem. he's in the game. >> the cnn poll was eight points more republican than democratic about -- >> look, he's not trying to win this -- >> it's just something the president doesn't want to talk about. >> look -- >> i talked to a republican consultant today who's as sensible as you usually are, who said it's unfortunate the last debate's on foreign policy. we need to get back to the economy. i think mitt romney, for example, would be a lot smarter to try to talk about china and see if he could connect that to jobs issues here in the u.s. he's not going to make progress on this libya issue. he just qualified himself -- >> we'll see, bob. >> hold on, hold on.
i've got to ask michael steele about this. what about the president's response about the very next day in the rose garden, he talked about an act of terror? i mean, are we -- that doesn't qualify? >> no, no, it does qualify, but then the question, this gets into the nuance and the semantics of what the president was referring to when he said that. is he specifically talking about this event in benghazi, or is he talking more broadly -- i read the transcript, and for my interpretation, he was not -- eight paragraphs later -- >> actually, two sentences are right next to each other. he said, acts of terror are unacceptable. the killing of our people in benghazi will be the people who will be brought to justice. why would he -- >> i did read it. >> why -- >> no, you didn't. >> why would he talk about an act of terror and then talk about benghazi -- was it a random thought, he was just sticking at top of the transcript? >> michael steele, go ahead. bob, let him talk. >> since you're so cocksure
about all of this, bob -- >> no, i'm not cocksure. i can listen, can i hear, and i can understand. >> bob, let me make my point. >> and i think you guys are despicable for trying to exploit the death of these americans. >> bob, let me make my point. >> final point, michael. >> the point is, if all of this was so true and the president meant specifically one he was talking about terrorism related to benghazi, then why did his secretary of state, was silent on the point for 14 days? why did he send his u.n. ambassador across every network imaginable, talking about something other than clarifying and defining this as a terrorist act? >> and we will leave it there, because the third and final debate will be on foreign policy. gentleman, we have to have you back talking about that as a preview. >> and michael, watch the first part of this show, where they showed the tape. intensity, very high. great, gentleman. great to have you with us >> love you, bob! all right. binders full of women. is that mitt romney's answer to pay inequality? is that his answer to pay
>> sam, we'll get back to you on that. >> yeah, we'll get back to you on that. we have to play that to be fair to the story. that was the romney campaign response on equal pay for women back in april. that would be six months ago. six months later, still don't have any answers. last night, both candidates were asked about pay equity. president obama pointed to the very first bill he signed, the lily ledbetter fair pay act, which gives women the ability to sue over pay inequity. mitt romney ignored the question, and instead discussed appointing women to top jobs while he was governor of massachusetts. >> and i went to my staff, and i said, how come all the people for these jobs are all men? and they said, well, these are the people that have qualifications. and i said, gosh, well, can't we find some women that are also qualified? >> well, in 2002, mitt romney was 55 years old and he had been a leader in the business world for decades. why didn't he know any qualified
women to appoint? >> and so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. i went to a number of women's groups and said, can you help us find folks, and they brought us whole binders full of women. >> that response prompted a huge response on social media. but governor romney's story doesn't quite add up. as "the huffington post" reports, the bipartisan women's coalition mass gap approached both romney and his democratic challenger before the 2002 gubernatorial election and pressured him to sign a pledge to appoint more women if they get elected. the group's former chairwoman says romney had little personal involvement with the group. instead, romney tasked his female nominee for lieutenant governor, carey healey, to work with the organization. mass gap presented the binders and highlighted qualified applicants to healey after romney was elected. president obama called out
romney's remark earlier today. >> i've got to tell you, we don't have to collect a bunch of binders to find qualified, talented, driven young women, ready to learn and teach in these fields, right now. >> as for equal pay for equal work, romney's campaign is still struggling to come up with a response. following the debate, romney's senior adviser, ed gillespie, told "the huffington post," the governor would not repeal the lily ledbetter act. he was opposed to it at the time. he would not repeal it. well, the sun came up and today gillespie is telling a different story. "i was wrong when i said last night governor romney opposed the lily ledbetter act. he never weighed in on it. as president, he would not seek to repeal it." let's turn to cecile richards, president of planned parenthood action fund, who is joining us tonight on behalf of the obama campaign. miss richards, great to have you with us tonight. what does -- what did we find out about mitt romney last night with this exchange?
>> well, it seems that what we found out is that he can't even answer a straight question. i thought that young woman, she was very clear what she wanted to know, which is, where was he on equal pay. and this is not a surprise question and the fact that he could not answer it is indicative of what he's trying to do on every women's issue, which is to muddy the waters and never give a direct answer. and i think, again, as you've repeated, it's clear he's not only not supportive of equal pay, he's not a leader on women's issues. and i think women saw that quite clearly last night. >> do you think that women in this country will be curious as to how a guy could be in the private sector for so many years and make so much money, yet not know any qualified women that he might want to turn to? >> look, i thought the entire debate, mr. romney seemed like he was stuck in the 1950s. and so on the equal pay, clearly, completely out to lunch. when it comes to women's health care, and obviously at planned parenthood, we care a lot about that, this is a guy who's saying
he wants to repeal roe, he wants to turn the clock back 40 years in this country for women. he wants to let bosses decide whether or not women can get birth control coverage. he wants to, in his own words, hays going to get rid of planned parenthood. i feel like he is out of touch with what women need in this country. i thought that was clearly on display last night. >> here's more of romney talking about women in the workplace last night. let's look at it. >> because i recognize that if you're going to have women in the workforce, that sometimes they need to be more flexible. my chief of staff, for instance, had two kids who were still in school. she said, i can't be here until 7:00 or 8:00 at night. i need to be able to get home at 5:00, so i can be there, making dinner for my kids and being with them when we get home from school, so we said, fine. >> "the new york times" editorial page got after that today. they wrote, "flexibility is a good policy, but what if a woman had wanted to go home early to study spanish or rebuild an old car or spend time with her lesbian partner? would mr. romney have been flexible about that? or if a man wanted similar
treatment? true equality is not satisfied by allowing the little lady to go home early and tend to her children." your thoughts on this exchange? >> i want to go back to the another point which is so abundantly clear to women. one of the reasons women have been able to enter the workforce, pursue higher education, take new jobs, is because of family planning. 99% of women in this country use birth control, yet mitt romney wants to turn back the clock on this too. he really, literally, and they were completely disingenuous about this last night. mitt romney would have supported the blunt amendment, which would let any employer in this country refuse to provide birth control for its employees and get rid of planned parenthood, which provides birth control to 3 million folks every year. he is not on the side of women, women entering the workforce, on women getting ahead, on these very fundamental issues of access to health care. i thought president obama laid out the case very clearly.
he has been a president who has been for women from day one. obviously, the lily ledbetter fair pay act was the first bill. and he is -- he has a record of standing up for women. i think mitt romney is lost back in, you know, decades. >> cecile richards, great to have you with us on "the ed show." thanks for joining us tonight. >> thanks, ed. there's a lot more coming in the next half hour of "the ed show." stay with us. >> she committed an act of journalistic terror or malpractice last night. >> you can't be the ref when you're the moderator. you absolutely cannot. >> the right wing, wambulance rides again. up next, karen finney on what all the whining about crowley really means. first, it was pots and pans. now it's the cleveland browns. i'll tell you about paul ryan's latest failed attempt to pander to ohio voters. and president obama gets tough on mitt romney about getting tough on china.
out of all of the issues in last night's debate, the candidates kept circling back and talking about china. in fact, the word "china" came up 21 times last night. so what's the point? mitt romney repeated his old stump speech line about getting tough on china, but his business philosophies, you have to admit if you're fair minded, tell a totally different story. as we speak, sensata technologies in freeport, illinois, is packing up and shipping out to china. almost 200 americans are losing their jobs. bain capital controls ownership of this company. so mitt romney's personal pile of money is going to get bigger. sensata can turn a bigger profit with cheaper labor in china. it's the romney economy. but romney acts like he feels
the pain of the american worker. >> the place where we've seen manufacturing go has been china. china is now the largest manufacturer in the world. used to be the united states of america. a lot of good people have lost jobs. people think it's more attractive, in some cases, to go offshore than to stay here. we have made it less attractive for enterprises to stay here than to go offshore from time to time. >> less attractive! those workers in china are going to make 99 cents an hour as opposed to $17 an hour in freeport, illinois. i can't wait to take the show there ton friday night and let the workers tell the story about how mitt romney is going to be tough on china. president obama wants to close the tax loopholes so it's not as attractive for romney's own company to ship jobs overseas. >> keep in mind that governor romney invested in companies that were pioneers of outsourcinto china. that's -- governor, you're the last person who's going to get tough on china.
>> let's bring in james hoffa, president of the international brotherhood of teamsters. mr. hoffa, great to have you with us tonight. >> good to be here. >> you bet. at any time during this campaign, especially last night, we'll focus on that, has mitt romney convinced anybody that he's an advocate for the middle class? this economy that he's talking about, he says that we have shipped the jobs is over there, as if our market and our workers aren't good enough. your response? >> well, that's more of this romney double talk about, he wants to lower the standards. i saw last night is the code word for, we can be more competitive if we didn't have unions, if we didn't have, you know, standards here in this country, if we didn't have a minimum wage. we could do a lot of manufacturing. i thought that was a code word to basically, let's reduce the standard of living for the american worker and then we'll have all of this manufacturing here. that's not america. that's not what we believe in. and that is what's wrong and flawed about everything that he does. and also his record at bain capital. he saw nothing wrong with closing down factories here and moving them to china.
his record speaks for itself. so he can't come before us now, when he's, you know, running for president and say, oh, isn't it terrible these jobs went over there? he's for it. and the only way he's saying that these jobs can come back is lowering standards. the president's got it right. the president's saying, let's get rid of any incentive to, you know, move jobs overseas. in fact, we'll make it an incentive to build a factory here. and tell these big corporations, that have billions and billions and trillions of dollars to make and build the factories here instead of shipping them to china. don't try to be so greedy. help america be strong. >> mr. hoffa, are you satisfied with president obama's actions on china in his first four years in office? >> well, i think he's done some things. he's brought over seven different actions with the wto against china. this has to deal with steel, tires, auto. >> bush never did that. >> he's on the right track. i think that's good, but i think he should be doing more. we've got a dialogue with china. china's not going away. it's an important market. but they've got to open up their market. basically, it's a one-way trade right now.
our trade deficit was $282 billion in '11 and it's going to be worse this time. it's going to be in the $300, $350 billion this time. they've got to open up their market if they're going to be our trading partners and they're not doing that. we've got to basically use the wto, use whatever we can, but we've got to open up that market so we can make products here in the united states, made by americans. let's put them on a boat and send them to china. that's the way to trade. >> mr. hoffa, thanks for your time tonight. a programming note, we will be live with the ed show in freeport, illinois, this friday night, broadcasting from what's become known as bainport. we will be highlighting the devastating effects of outsourcing. you're not going to want to miss it. we'll bring you the real stories of what happened to those families. and by the way, the sensata plant had a record profit last year. coming up, it was a rough day for paul ryan and the world of sports. ah, he's just a regular guy, you know? i'll tell you how the vp candidate managed to fumble with the wisconsin badgers and the
and we are back. no republican has won the white house without winning ohio. so i guess we can expect the republicans to probably change the electoral college next. but between mitt romney and paul ryan, the republican ticket, they have visited the state a total of 45 times. the last thing they want to do is alienate ohio voters. i mean, they're looking for love. which put vice presidential candidate and wisconsin native paul ryan in a tough spot this morning.
>> wisconsin will play ohio state in a football game. i want you to tell the people of ohio who's going to win that game. >> they -- they spoil -- they spoiled us last year, we spoiled them the year before, and jen and i were at that game. it really depends on who has the better record is going to lose, because that's what happens. >> who wins, congressman? who's going to win? >> it will depend on who's got the better record. it always depends on who's got the better record. it's in madison this year. home field advantage works well. but if we're doing better, they'll beat us, and if they have a better record, we'll beat them. that's always how it goes between the badgers and the buckeyes. how's that for an answer? >> it's a terrible answer. >> badgers, don't you feel the love? no home team loyalty whatsoever. and that wasn't the only sports-related mess that ryan found himself in today. on a visit to the cleveland browns practice facility, ryan
took a moment to praise, praise rookie quarterback brandon whedon. ryan recalled whedon playing for oklahoma state. he told the story pointing at backup quarterback colt mccoy. according to the cleveland plain dealer, the congressman pleaded for mercy and blamed helmets for mistakes mccoy for red-headed whedon. might not seem like a big deal, but if you're going to pander to the sports fans, can you at least get the quarterback right? tonight in our survey, i asked you, who won last night's debate? 96% of you say president obama, 4% of you say mitt romney. coming up, when you're complaining about the debate moderator, you're losing. and boy, was fox news complaining last night, this morning, 24/7, they're complaining. karen finney joins me. stay with us.
the moderator was say welcome because she sort of weighed in, to help the president. >> i'm not going to whine about the rules or the moderator. i will say, though, that tonight, point-blank, to the president lied to the american people about libya, i think the moderator may have helped that along as well. >> we've got candy crowley's intervention, which was essentially incorrect. when you have the moderator intervening on behalf of obama, that, i think, swung it in a way that i think was basically incorrect and unfair. >> and candy crowley had no business during an on -- realtime, if you will, trying to fact check, because she was dead wrong. >> i tell you, they are amazing. this morning the gang at "fox & friends," well, they kept it up. >> and the problem was, candy crowley, who is supposed to be the moderator, was, and i saw joe trippi after the debate last night say, it was like she was the ref. she threw a flag. you're not supposed to do that. the time for fact checking is after the event, not during it.
she made a gigantic mistake and i think mr. romney was knocked off his kilter. >> i don't have a problem with candy being a ref as long as she's right. >> no, you can't be the ref when you're the moderator. you absolutely cannot. >> if somebody says something outrageous, of course you have to be the ref. >> but in this case, she was wrong. >> she was wrong, that's what i just said. >> oh, weapon certainly want truth to enter the arena, at any time. of course, candy crowley was not wrong. but this didn't stop tucker carlson from taking it one step further. >> and she threw the president a lifeline. there's no question, she inserted herself again and again into this debate. they should just eliminate moderators overall. every one of them wants to insert him or herself into this, they can't help it, they're tv people. >> that's right, just get rid of moderators. free for all, whatever. although, particularly, if your guy is losing. here's laura ingraham. she had another suggestion. this is a bright one. she tweeted, "should we ditch the town hall debate format in 2016?
if so, why? if not, why not?" and i thought to myself, god forbid if we actually have a taxpayer ask a question to someone who wants to be the leader of the free world. joining me now is karen finney, msnbc political analyst and former communications director of the dnc. let's talk about candy crowley. did she go overboard? i want to say that she, by profession, has been a reporter. and so her instincts took over. the truth does matter. what do you make of all of this, karen? >> it does matter. you know, it was so interesting that also on twitter, just to see -- i mean, the right wing was coming unglued. and the fact that they were also arguing over the difference between acts of terror and terrorism, literally, that was the argument that they were having as to whether or not the president really said this. and once we were confronting them with the actual video and the actual transcript, then they went to, well, candy shouldn't have said that and she was wrong. i mean, look.
the reality is, mitt romney has tried now twice to politicize what happened in benghazi. he told us in boca raton, when he talked about the 47%, that he would do exactly that if the opportunity arose. he was wrong. he didn't have his facts right. and now the right wing is trying to cover for him. >> i don't know what kind of sound bite they're looking for from the president. he was very clear in the rose garden the day after the attack. and we know that they're really going after it. here is another complaint from the folks over at fox. listen to this. >> and it was once again candy crowley, who is the person who picked all of the questions. she also was in charge of the clock. and who won? well, as it turns out, when you look at the time, the president did wind up getting about, when you see right there, a little more than three minutes longer. >> actually, candy should have let "fox & friends" make up all the questions, don't you think? i mean, how valid are these complaints? >> oh, absolutely. they're ridiculous.
and you know what, ed here's the thing, they're really doing mitt romney a disservice. because this whining and complaining about semantics and about the, you know, the questions and about candy really makes it seem like they don't actually have faith that their guy is ready for prime-time. why not -- why don't they have this conversation about the substance? i mean, mitt romney actually was okay. i mean, he did what he needed to do. i thought president obama was far superior and did an excellent job, but you would think they would be trying to build up their candidate rather than try to tear down the moderator to try to pretend like that was the problem. >> well, this volley back and forth about libya certainly sets the table for the third and final debate, which is going to be on foreign policy on monday night. karen finney, great to have you with us tonight. thanks so much. that's "the ed show." i'm ed schultz. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. and i want to say that i had no problems sleeping last night. how about you? >> i slept very soundly last night. in part because i was so wrung out. it was fun to wa